Search Results for: dubious donations
October 30, 2012 — Scott Johnson
The Obama campaign has chosen to operate an online contribution system that facilitates illegal falsely sourced contributions, illegal foreign contributions and the evasion of contribution limits. We’ve noted how the campaign facilitates illegal foreign contributions here (a case study provided by the New York Post) and here (a case study provided by PJ Media). The theory and practice of the Obama campaign’s shenanigans are laid out in the Government Accountability
»
October 25, 2012 — Scott Johnson
Earlier this month the Government Accountability Institute report cited chapter and verse showing how the Obama campaign was set up to facilitate illegal foreign contributions (among other kinds of illegal contributions). We wrote about the case study provided by the New York Post a few days ago. Over at PJ Media, Mike McNally goes the whole nine yards to show how the Obama campaign accepts illegal foreign contributions. McNally is
»
October 24, 2012 — Scott Johnson
Earlier this week the Government Accountability Institute published yet another report featuring Obama’s dubious donations. The GAI has posted a PDF of the report here. Courtesy of readers Hunter Schultz, Sean Mahan, Charlie King, Jim Bell, Jim Arneson and Dave Wollstadt — thanks to you all — I’m posting the report’s chart from page 3 below. Analyze this: GAI president Peter Schweizer describes the report as “a big picture look
»
October 21, 2012 — Scott Johnson
I first wrote about Barack Obama’s “Dubious donations” for the New York Post just before the 2008 election. We returned to the subject earlier this month in a series of posts upon the publication of the Government Accountability Institute report documenting this fact: Same as it ever was. Today the New York Post arrives on the scene at just about the same point in the campaign that I did four
»
October 10, 2012 — Scott Johnson
Peter Schweizer has forwarded this column addressing the Obama campaign’s response to the Government Accountability Institute report we have been covering: The Government Accountability Institute’s 108-page report is a detailed investigation of the widespread vulnerability of federal campaigns to fraudulent and foreign donations. The Obama campaign’s response to the report has been surprisingly defensive. As the report demonstrates, this is a systemic problem that affects Republicans and Democrats alike. The
»
October 10, 2012 — Scott Johnson
I called Peter Schweizer to get his comments on each of the five substantive points with which Obama For America has responded to the Government Accountability Institute report released earlier this week. Below are each of the Obama campaign’s substantive points (in italics) with Peter’s response following, based on my notes. 1. All credit card contributions are processed using AN Address Verification System (AVS) to ensure their legitimacy. Peter responds:
»
October 10, 2012 — Scott Johnson
The Obama campaign has posted a response to the Government Accountability Institute report that addresses the campaign’s online fundraising methodology. I wrote about the report most recently in “Dubious donations: Hasen down the wind.” Here is the Obama campaign’s response (links not included): Amidst the unparalleled spending from super PAC billionaires and outside groups, nearly 4 million Americans have come together to change the face of this race and help
»
October 9, 2012 — Scott Johnson
Liberal election law expert Rick Hasen, professor at the University of California Irvine Law School and proprietor of the Election Law Blog, characterizes the revelations of the Government Accountability Institute report on foreign and fraudulent online campaign donations as “much ado about nothing.” Hasen adds in an update: “It is profoundly ironic that these Republican leaning groups are claiming that there needs to be better disclosure of contributions to the
»
October 8, 2012 — Scott Johnson
We’ve been following the story of the Obama campaign’s slipshod fundraising methods since 2008. I took a whack at explaining what we had learned as of October 27, 2008 in the New York Post column “Dubious donations.” We returned to the subject earlier this year in several posts, the last of which was “Dubious donations: Obama campaign statement.” The campaign statement was issued to Rick Hasen’s Election Law Blog, with
»
October 5, 2012 — Scott Johnson
We’ve been following the story of the Obama campaign’s slipshod fundraising methods since 2008. I took a whack at explaining what we had learned as of October 27, 2008 in the New York Post column “Dubious donations.” We returned to the subject earlier this year in several posts, the last of which was “Dubious donations: Obama campaign statement.” The campaign statement was issued to Rick Hasen’s Election Law Blog, with
»
May 10, 2012 — Scott Johnson
Over at the Election Law Blog, Professor Rick Hasen has posted a statement from the Obama campaign on the charge that it does not follow best practices to prevent fraudulent donations to the campaign. Here it is in its entirety verbatim: Credit card contributions to Obama for America are, in fact, processed using AVS (Address Verification System). If a billing address is verified via AVS, then the credit card contribution
»
May 7, 2012 — Scott Johnson
We’re trying to make this easy for any serious journalist who wants to dig into this story. Yesterday we posted the story of Bill G., a victim of the kind of credit card fraud that the Obama campaign facilitated in 2008, and is inviting again this year, by rejecting basic verification devices. Today reader Ashley Tate writes from Alpharetta, Georgia to explain: In December 2009 our Mastercard was illegally charged
»
May 6, 2012 — Scott Johnson
We have been following the Obama campaign’s invitation of fraudulent and illegal giving through the disabling of basic credit card/debit card verification devices. We have done so in the hope that it might arouse the interest of the mainstream media sufficiently to cause them to ask a few question of the powers-that-be in the Obama campaign. It’s a rerun of a story that originated in 2008. Love may be lovelier
»
May 3, 2012 — Scott Johnson
We have published a series of posts on Obama’s “dubious donations” — i.e., the Obama campaign’s invitation of fraudulent and illegal giving through the disabling of basic credit card/debit card verification devices. I wrote about the Obama campaign fundraising operation in the October 2008 New York Post column “Dubious donations.” The Post subhead observed: “Bam’s Web site invites fraud.” The Washington Post reported on the matter two days later in
»
April 3, 2012 — John Hinderaker
The Obama re-election campaign fundraising scandal deserves to be, and I think inevitably will be, a major news story. Earlier this morning I decided to find out how far an illegal donor could push the envelope and still have his contribution welcomed by the Obama campaign. So, like a number of our readers, I went to the Donate to Obama page and identified myself as Illegal Contributor. I entered my
»
April 3, 2012 — Scott Johnson
Among the many dubious donations Barack Obama received in 2008 were two from readers who contributed under the names “Joseph Stalin” (Address: “114 Gulag St, Stalingrad, LA”) and “Imon Deathrow” (Address: “13 Alcatraz Island, Laststop, CA”). Reader Claudia Brown writes to discuss a third that she repeated last week: So glad you are shining some light on this scheme. Like your various contributors, I too made a couple of bogus
»
April 2, 2012 — Scott Johnson
Another reader reports that he was able to make a donation to the 2012 Obama campaign as Usama bin Laden (Address: “6 feetunder Drive, Islamabad, DC”) without any credit card verification. He writes: “The irony is that when I tried to make a contribution for $1, I received an error that the donation must be at least $2.” Our reader received an email from the Obama campaign thanking Usama for
»
